Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34984475›Full record

ArticleActa orthopaedica2022

Patient-reported outcome after primary and aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: 1-year follow-up of 3,559 primary and 406 revision THAs in an institutional registry.

Tina S Wik, Jomar Klaksvik, Otto S Husby, Astrid Rasch, Siri B Winther

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Tina S WikDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Olavs hospital, Trondheim; Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU, Trondheim. tina.s.wik@ntnu.no.
Jomar KlaksvikDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Olavs hospital, Trondheim. jomar.klaksvik@ntnu.no.
Otto S HusbyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Olavs hospital, Trondheim; Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU, Trondheim. otto.husby@stolav.no.
Astrid RaschDepartment of Clinical Services, St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. Astrid.rasch@stolav.no.
Siri B WintherDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Olavs hospital, Trondheim. siri.bjorgen@ntnu.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose - Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and revision THA are important information in the preoperative shared decision-making process. We present 1-year results on pain, function, and quality of life following primary and revision THA. Patients and methods - From 2010 to 2018, 3,559 primary THA and 406 revision THAs were included in our institutional quality registry. PROMs were registered preoperatively, 3 months, and 1 year after surgery, numeric rating scale (0-10) for pain during mobilization and at rest, healthrelated quality of life (EQ-5D), and a hip-specific physical function score (HOOS-PS). 2 anchor questions were asked 1 year after surgery concerning joint function and willingness to go through surgery again. Results - There were statistically significant improvements in all PROMs at the 3-month follow-up in both groups. All PROMs improved more in the primary group relative to the revision group. 1 year after surgery, pain during mobilization was reduced with a mean change of 5.1 (SD 2.6) for primary THA and 2.9 (SD 3.0) for revision THA. 93% of primary THA patients reported both better function 1 year after surgery and that they would have gone through surgery again, compared with 78% and 79% in the revision THA group. Interpretation - Primary THA patients reported better function and more pain relief than the revision THA group 1 year after surgery. Pain during mobilization shows the most marked improvement in both groups, which is important preoperative information for patients.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipHip ProsthesisFollow-Up StudiesHumansPainPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeRegistriesReoperationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID34984475
PMCPMC8815322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.